Episcopal and Catholic Church Double Standards? Clergy Sex Abuse Among The Navajos

Ok a tough long post where I will try not to offend the various groups that might be offended .

If you start to get offended and are part of the communities involved please read this whole piece through.

I was over at MCJ and saw this entry about the The Episcopal Church's recent Ordination of a new Bishop in Navajoland.

Now I am not getting into what seems to interest people the most there and the rest of TEC blog land. That is the controversy over mixing traditional Christian liturgy with Native American religious elements.

What got me interested was this comment on MCJ's post:

"I have a soft spot for Navajos, so I’m going easy on the native incense. Incense is used in many Christian contexts. If somebody comes up with research that shows that the use of this incense was an invocation of pagan gods, then I suppose I’ll have to back off, but reluctantly, because I have the soft spot for the culture. The medicine man’s prayers might be more problematic, depending on what he said.

What really bothers me is the prominence given to the memory of Bishop Steven Plummer, who acknowledged having sodomized a young boy for two years, was put on suspension for one year, and then re-admitted to the ministry, serving until his death. This current article is an interesting summary of how sex abuse cases have been handled in ECUSA. The Episcopal Church had a commendable commitment to ministry among the Navajo, and this scandal did it no good at all."

Now that seems something that should be explored!!

This abuse scandal broke into the news around 1993 .

I have not found much on this except for this interesting article from the time period. This part struck me:

Versions of how the church first learned of Plummer's misconduct differ. Browning and Bishop Harold Hopkins, director of the Office of Pastoral Development, said Plummer reported the activity himself.

But Sosa said that Plummer went to Browning two years ago only after Sosa first informed national church authorities in March, 1991. The local church council, however, was not informed until this month when Sosa went to them directly.

Sosa said Plummer disclosed his sexual encounters with the teen-age boy in November, 1990, while they drove to a meeting. Later, Sosa said, Plummer used "sexually loaded" language with him that rekindled disturbing memories of Sosa's own sexual victimization as a child.

Hopkins said Plummer categorically denied Sosa's charge. Sosa, who is married, said he is on voluntary leave of absence and re-evaluating whether to seek ordination to the priesthood.

Sosa said he was later suspended from duties as a deacon by Plummer, reportedly on grounds that Sosa broke conditions of a his leave by reading the Gospel in a church service without the bishop's permission.

Returning to the story that MCJ links:

Several hundred Diné — many wearing traditional Navajo clothing — visitors and guests attended the 11 a.m. service. Medicine Man Herbert Yazzie led the procession with prayers, followed by Catharine Plummer, widow of the late Navajo Bishop Steven Plummer. She and Cathlena Plummer, using sacred blessing bowls and eagle feathers, smudged the gathering with smoldering sage and sweetgrass incense, a traditional ritual of blessing and cleansing...

Rose Ann Sandoval, sister of the late Bishop Plummer, is producing a cope and mitre with traditional Navajo design for Bailey......

In fact we are learning that there will be a school named After Bishop Plummer!!

We learn that the New Bishop is all for it:
Creation of the Bishop Steven Plummer School. The school would offer training within Navajoland especially for those identified for ordained and licensed lay ministries. It would operate as part of the Hooghan Learning Circle, the education program of ECN. It is to be named in memory of the late Rt. Rev. Steven Plummer, the first Navajo to serve as Bishop of Navajoland. His dream, noted Bailey, was to have more Navajo educated so they could serve all ministries of the church, and especially at the altar.......

I located this 2005 Obit that was run by the Episcopal news service when Plummer died . Now he does seem like a incredible man. However I note as to that obit:

The Navajoland Area Mission was created in part to help give Native Americans a chance to develop their own direction and fulfillment," he added.

In 1993 Plummer took a voluntary one year leave of absence to evaluate his personal life and ministry. He resumed his ministry as bishop of Navajoland in June 1994 with the support of Browning and the House of Bishops.

Well OK I guess that is true in a way.

Last week,the paper up in Pittsburg, that is dealing with it's own particular sex abuse scandal, had this to say in an article on Sex abuse in the Episcopal Church.

.........That same year an Episcopal deacon in the New Mexico-based Diocese of Navajoland said that Bishop Steven Plummer had admitted sexually abusing an adolescent boy for two years. The deacon pursued church charges against Bishop Plummer, who suspended him. The case hit the media in 1993.

The diocese sent Bishop Plummer for a psychological evaluation and Presiding Bishop Browning suspended him. After the evaluation said he was unlikely to reoffend, Bishop Browing reinstated him. When Bishop Plummer died in office in 2005, Episcopal News Service ran a glowing obituary, noting only that "he took a year's leave in 1993 after acknowledging a relationship with a teen-age boy."

During Bishop Browning's 1986-98 tenure as presiding bishop, his adviser on abuse cases was Bishop Harold Hopkins, director of the Office of Pastoral Development. Bishop Hopkins, now retired in Maine, was involved the cases of both Bishop Plummer and Bishop Davis.

Back then church law made it difficult to pursue clergy misconduct, he said. The problem was compounded because many victims wouldn't file formal complaints. Some didn't even want the abuser removed.

"For some reason they wanted the presiding bishop to know about it, but they didn't want anything done. That's very difficult. We would try to hard to convince the person that we needed a formal complaint," he said.

If there was no formal charge, "There were a number of cases where the presiding bishop went ahead and disciplined the person anyway," Bishop Hopkins said.

In Bishop Plummer's case, the fact that the victim wouldn't file a charge, the length of time since that abuse, the psychological report and a desire to let the Navajo govern themselves led Bishop Browning to allow the diocese to vote on Bishop Plummer's fate, Bishop Hopkins said. The vote was to reinstate him.

"He agreed to meet regularly with psychotherapists and ... with a bishop nearby who was appointed his supervisor," Bishop Hopkins said.

Mr. Clohessy, the victims' advocate, said that no abuser should return to ministry and that laity shouldn't vote on it because they tend to believe that "nice guys" can't be predators.

"It's a terribly reckless approach that abdicates responsibility and jeopardizes kids," he said. "Those who molest kids are usually very charismatic, charming and personable ... We've never seen congregants vote against an accused offender."

Some bishops privately questioned the reinstatement, but none spoke up, Bishop Frey said. He found it a troubling contrast with the decision, two years earlier, to strip the clergy credentials of the Rev. Wallace Frey -- no relation -- a denominational officer accused of sexual misconduct with young adult men.

"He was removed very quickly and publicly," Bishop Frey said. "So the case with Steven Plummer was weird, because the accusations were there and were publicly acknowledged, but Steven was readmitted to office. ... I don't believe that anyone challenged it publicly in the House of Bishops, but there was a lot of conversation about the difference in the way these were handled."...........

Yet his memory was celebrated at this recent ordination service and the Bishop Plummer school is FULL STEAM AHEAD!!

I will return to the David Clohessy's comments mentioned in another future post on another related matter

Now I find it interesting the the secular media seems to have no interest in all this stuff that is going on. Just google news yourself!!

If this was happening at a Catholic Navajo mission ,I got to think the New York Times would be screaming.

I found this one article from a local newspaper that talks about the service for the ordination of the new Bishop. I found this intriguing:

... Bailey became a priest in 1980. He was the rector at St. Stephen's Episcopal Church in Phoenix and chaired the Native American Ministries in the Diocese of Arizona. He was also an administrative assistant to Plummer when he was bishop.

As an assistant to Plummer he helped draft the area mission's economic development plan and mission statement. One of the future goals for the mission is for it to become it's own diocese.

Hmmm. Now I don't know want to defame this new Episcopal Bishop at all. However we have seen that a lot of people had reservations in the TEC how the Plummer matter was resolved.

So where was then Father Bailey in all this? He seemed connected to Plummer. He seems to have been very involved in the TEC Native American Ministry. What is the time line as to his various positions and the Plummer sexual abuse matter? Well if you go to the Dicoese's web site and click on the Bishop Bailey Link we learn

David E. Bailey
The Rt. Rev. Dave Bailey was consecrated Bishop on August 7, 2010. He previously served the
Diocese of Utah as Executive Officer, Canon to the Ordinary, and Deployment Officer.
Prior to Utah, he served in Arizona as rector of St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church in Phoenix. It was while at St. Stephen’s that he began his long term relationship with Navajoland.

Dave was chair of Native American Ministries in the Diocese of Arizona from 1998 (SIC 88) to 1993, and was the liaison to Bishop Steven Plummer in Navajoland when Bishop Plummer and the ECN co-hosted the 1991 General Convention in Phoenix.

In 1994, Presiding Bishop Browning invited Dave to serve as Bishop Plummer’s Administrative Mentor, which he did until 1997, just prior to his move to Utah. During this time, Canon Bailey also helped ECN to develop a mission statement as well as economic development plans and was instrumental in helping Good Shepherd Mission, Fort Defiance, begin their Retreat House program.

While in Utah, he continued to serve ECN in varying capacities as needed. He assisted Bishops
Plummer, Kimsey and McDonald in their work in Navajoland and was later appointed as Canon to the Ordinary of ECN.

Canon Bailey is married to Anne Bailey. They have three grown children and three grandchildren.

It seems he was around at the times in question. Who knows what is going on. Maybe nothing.

We know from experience in Catholic circles that tight ethnic groups keep a lot of their dirty laundry in the community. This includes clergy sex abuse. One could be sort of disturbed in the earlier linked article about the Deacon who turned him in, about possible signs that indicate this might not have been a one time event for Bishop Plummer.

That is:
Sosa said Plummer disclosed his sexual encounters with the teen-age boy in November, 1990, while they drove to a meeting. Later, Sosa said, Plummer used "sexually loaded" language with him that rekindled disturbing memories of Sosa's own sexual victimization as a child.

This Deacon later got dismissed if you recall. Where was the now Bishop Bailey in what must be a very close knit community. Maybe nowhere.

Again we don't know. No one seems to care to ask. Perhaps he came in and cleaned things up and made sure the Bishop behaved himself. In fact that might be very likely.Bishop Bailey might be right there under the Vrgin Mary herself in holiness. However after reading to sex abuse stories involving the Catholic Church, it strikes me how the usual questions are not being asked.

Now let me clear up some matters.

The Catholic Church is often accused of trying to play games when it says as to clergy sexual abuse we must look at two categories.

That is pedophilia (sex with children) and Ephebophilia .

Ephebophilia may be defined as a sexual preference for girls generally 14–18 years old, and boys generally 14–19 years old. Some have define ephebophilia as a sexual preference of pubescent and adolescent boys.

Most cases of Catholic Clergy Abuse have involved ephebophilla.

Now the Catholic Church is not thrilled with Priests that have sex with teenagers

That being said I think it views correctly, as to evaluating the Priest, that it brings in different considerations and options.

In ephebophilla , I feel we have to divide that group into two sub groups.

That is first those that are predators in a real sense because their actions are a ABUSE OF AUTHORITY. That is they are using their position in grooming teenage girls and boys for sexual exploitation.

The other group would be priests that had a lapse (still not good) and had a sexual relationship with a teenager. This last group at could be rehabilitated I believe.

It appears that Bishop Plummer might fit into that last category.

He might have had a same sex attraction for two years to a 16 to a 17 year old. Note that I can't find the exact age of the victim when this incident occurred.

Of course the younger the "teenager" the worse it gets and look like more in reality like pedophilia .

For instance I think people feel there is real difference between a 13 year old male and a 16 year old one.

However the fact that this was not a one time event but went on for a period of time is troubling. In other words the Episcopal Bishop did not just lose control once.

Now when the Catholic Church engages this in these terms we get blasted!! If we discover that 20 years ago a Priest had a moral failing and had sex with 16 year old boy or girl he should be immediately removed from the Priesthood forever we are told! Even though there are no indications it ever happened again.

However in this case this man's memory is celebrated and he has a school named after him. I am trying to imagine the media reaction if this was occurring in a Catholic context.

Again maybe the actions of this Navajo TEC community was correct when they demanded that he be their Bishop again. As I said his obit was impressive.

Perhaps this was a one time illicit relationship and out of it came things that advanced the cause of the Body of Christ. The Bishop sinned but repented. I am very OK with that. In fact I would maybe support the same thing in Catholic Land if he were just a Priest.

Still as a Catholic I can't help but note what appears to be a double standard that is going on here in many areas.